Are We Better In The Passing Game?

[mgteich]

I don't think that our running game is better. However, our passing game should be much, much better.

TIGHT ENDS - MAJOR PLUS
We should get more production from the #1, #2 and #3 TE positions, and in the total for tight ends.

WIDE RECEIVERS - MAJOR PLUS
Player who caught 94% of last year's passes are back. The three 2012 injured newbies are healthy and have a year of experience with Brady. And LaFell is a major upgrade over Boyce.

RUNNING BACKS - MAJOR PLUS
Vereen is healthy. This fact should increase the likely total production from the running backs.

OFFENSIVE LINE - A MINUS
We don't know how much of minus this will be; but it is a surely a loss to lose Mankins.

 

[Mark12]

I would say substantially better. As it has been noted, Mankins wasn't great at pass-blocking. His departure will mainly negatively affect the run-game.

As for our passing game, it is a no brainer. All our weapons are healthy and a year under the system. I can't imagine Brady having the awful numbers (for his standards) and the 3rd-down mediocrity we had last year.

 

[BelichickFan]

The passing game should be awfully good. I'm hoping that teams having to play to defend the pass more will open up the run. Getting Gronk's blocking back should somewhat offset losing Mankins. But certainly looked at individually the run should be worse and the pass should be much, much better.

 

[james87654]

i agree......i expect our passing game to be very good

 

[Ring 6]

The running game from the spread and hurry up should be much better with vereen in there full time along with gronk and improved weapons.
The 131 or 122 personnel running game is the question but Ridley is still the best back we have had in years and plus gronk minus mankins may be a net plus in the running game.

 

[ausbacker]

The running game should be better because the passing game should improve.

The passing game should improve because the running game should be better.

#Confucius

 

[FourierSeries]

Remember how explosive the offense was with Gronk in the lineup last year? It was scoring at a higher pace than Denver's record breaking offense.

This year Dobson has a year of experience in the system and seems to have improved, we have a better TE2 than we did last year, and we have a tall receiver in Lafell who can be a good redzone target. And Vereen will hopefully be healthy all year.

I see this offense being top 3 if Gronk plays a full season.

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

How healthy will the team be and how will 'next man up' players perform when whatever level of injury concerns mount? It's the big unknown for every team that affects production and largely can't be estimated.
That constant and unknown aside, the Patriots don't lack for guys that can produce above the norm. Gronk, JE, Vereen have all shown better than standard ability to produce. Yet we also have Amendola, LeFell, Thomkins, Dobson, Wright. Every single one of these guys has demonstrated the ability to solidly produce in repeated spots (which tells me given the right usage they can/will produce regularly). It's the OL that is the BIG ? and can dampen what otherwise looks like a passing game that will produce approx. 30 points a game on average. Specifically, as we all know, it's between the tackles that is the BIG ??
Anyone who can answer that question accurately, IMHO, has answered how effective and potent the passing game will be (with, again, the unknown factor of injuries).

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

The running game from the spread and hurry up should be much better with vereen in there full time along with gronk and improved weapons.
The 131 or 122 personnel running game is the question but Ridley is still the best back we have had in years and plus gronk minus mankins may be a net plus in the running game.

Running game? I thought the NFL made that illegal....

 

[RIpats88]

I think our passing game should be better than our running game...but just because of last year, lets not sit back on Ridley. here is a guy who still had a season with 1200yards and 12td's if he can hold onto the ball, no reason he can't replicate that.

 

[Oswlek]

Under the assumption that Gronk misses half the season, Amendola breaks a bone in week 1, both Thompkins and Dobson miss half the season and both Wright and LaFell flop then, no, they won't be any better.

Otherwise, it is pretty much a certainty.

 

[Brady6]

OFFENSIVE LINE - A MINUS
We don't know how much of minus this will be; but it is a surely a loss to lose Mankins.

See this is where we disagree, in recent years Mankins had really regressed in pass protection, he allowed 11 sacks last season more than any player on the OL. Mankins will be missed in the run game, but if we are purely talking about the passing game there is a good chance that the OL will be better without Mankins out there.

 

[mgteich]

See this is where we disagree, in recent years Mankins had really regressed in pass protection, he allowed 11 sacks last season more than any player on the OL. Mankins will be missed in the run game, but if we are purely talking about the passing game there is a good chance that the OL will be better without Mankins out there.

So, your position is that our 2013 guards will be stronger than our 2012 guards. If so, I disagree.

The issue is has nothing to do with 2013 Mankins.

I want folks to be REALLY clear about what you are saying. You are saying that CANNON (your choice to start) is a better OG that Mankins was in 2012.

 

[Brady6]

So, your position is that our 2013 guards will be stronger than our 2012 guards. If so, I disagree.

The issue is has nothing to do with 2013 Mankins.

27.5% of the sacks on Brady were credits against Mankins, how can you suggest he was not part of the problem?

I think this line is better in pass protection than last years:

LT- Solder
LG- Vollmer
OC- Connolly
RG- Kline/Devey
RT- Cannon

 

[mgteich]

You are free to believe that we had a terrible line last year and that Mankins was a terrible guard. We see Belichick's decisions and try to make sense of it. Of course, a few months ago, Wendell and Connolly were the problem in our horrible pass protection.

Personally, I think that PROBLEM in our passing game last year had much more to do with personnel than with blocking by the OL. When the receivers don't know where to be, there are more sacks. When Gronk is not on the field, the blocking isn't as good.

I think it instructive that you were not blaming Mankins for the terrible pass protection before he was cut. Two months ago, the problems were Wendell and Connolly.
===============

BOTTOM LINE
We had a fine passing team last year that will be greatly improved because the receivers have a year of experience with Brady, and because of the increased availability of Gronk, Vereen, LaFell and Wright.

When the passing game improves (as we all expect), you are certainly free to suggest that reason for the improvement is the addition of Kline/Devey and Cannon to the starting lineup. I'm sure that there will be some that will agree with you.

27.5% of the sacks on Brady were credits against Mankins, how can you suggest he was not part of the problem?

I think this line is better in pass protection than last years:

LT- Solder
LG- Vollmer
OC- Connolly
RG- Kline/Devey
RT- Cannon

 

[Brady6]

You are free to believe that we had a terrible line last year and that Mankins was a terrible guard. We see Belichick's decisions and try to make sense of it. Of course, a few months ago, Wendell and Connolly were the problem in our horrible pass protection.

Personally, I think that PROBLEM in our passing game last year had much more to do with personnel than with blocking by the OL. When the receivers don't know where to be, there are more sacks. When Gronk is not on the field, the blocking isn't as good.

I think it instructive that you were not blaming Mankins for the terrible pass protection before he was cut. Two months ago, the problems were Wendell and Connolly.

The problem was Mankins, Wendell, and Connolly, I have said that the entire offseason. Mankins had regressed, if you did not see that I would be shocked, since 2011 he has been a shell of his former self in pass protection.

 

[patchick]

You are free to believe that we had a terrible line last year and that Mankins was a terrible guard.

I don't believe the poster said that at all, and claiming he did is likely to turn the thread into a pointless argument....

In any case, it's pretty clear that barring injury, the WR, TE and RBs (as pertains to the passing game) should all be dramatically improved from the corps the team fielded last year. That's seriously exciting

The OL, to me, is simply unknown. I could propose half a dozen different potential starting lines, and they'd probably all be wrong. But could the unknown line possibly be better than last year's, despite Mankins' departure? With a healthy Vollmer and a different center, sure.

 

[mgteich]

The poster said that Mankins was responsible for over 1/4 of 2012 sacks, had really regressed, and that the OL will be better without him out there. Other players believed that he is one of the top 100 players in the game. This is far from us being better off with Kline or Devey. I might note that before a few days ago, it was Cannon was also included in those who were better guards than Mankins.

So, no he didn't say he was a "terrible" guard (i exaggerated a bit). He did allow that he was a good run blocker. I note that we are talking about the 2012 Mankins.

Even at the end of last year, most of us, and most analysts, thought that Mankins was one of the better guards in the NFL, and one of the top 100 players in the league, so I stand by my disagreement with the poster.

However, I am NOT disagreeing with Belichick's decision to cut Mankins. His cost was high and many of us agreed that the decision would need to be made next year. Of course, when we last discussed this, many scoffed at the idea of us cutting Mankins this year or next.

I don't believe the poster said that at all,

 

[Brady6]

The poster said that Mankins was responsible for over 1/4 of 2012 sacks, had really regressed, and that the OL will be better without him out there.

So, no he didn't say he was a "terrible" guard (i exaggerated a bit). He did allow that he was a good run blocker.

Even at the end of last year, most of us, and most analysts, thought that Mankins was one of the better guards in the NFL, so I stand by my disagreement with the poster.

However, I am NOT disagreeing with Belichick's decision to cut Mankins. His cost was high and many of us agreed that the decision would need to be made next year. Of course, when we last discussed this, many scoffed at the idea of us cutting Mankins this year or next.

Outside of moving outside to LT and playing well against the Ravens Mankins did not do anything noteworthy last season that would suggest he was still one of the better guards in the NFL. He led all guards in sacks allowed, was fourth in QB disruptions allowed, and led the Patriots OL with 5 penalties against him. He was a lot closer to being in Dan Connolly’s class of guards than he was to being in Evan Mathis class at this juncture in his career.

As far as saying he was terrible or even close to that, you are exaggerating what I said x100 there is a difference recognizing shortcomings and saying something is terrible.

 

[Ring 6]

The poster said that Mankins was responsible for over 1/4 of 2012 sacks, had really regressed, and that the OL will be better without him out there. Other players believed that he is one of the top 100 players in the game. This is far from us being better off with Kline or Devey. I might note that before a few days ago, it was Cannon was also included in those who were better guards than Mankins.

So, no he didn't say he was a "terrible" guard (i exaggerated a bit). He did allow that he was a good run blocker. I note that we are talking about the 2012 Mankins.

Even at the end of last year, most of us, and most analysts, thought that Mankins was one of the better guards in the NFL, and one of the top 100 players in the league, so I stand by my disagreement with the poster.

However, I am NOT disagreeing with Belichick's decision to cut Mankins. His cost was high and many of us agreed that the decision would need to be made next year. Of course, when we last discussed this, many scoffed at the idea of us cutting Mankins this year or next.

You can't honestly use NFLNs top 100 as an appeal to authority. That ended when Tim Tebow made the list.